Hello Bob,
On Wed 2012-Apr-18 04:54, BOB KLAHN (1:123/140) wrote to RICHARD WEBB:
RW>> NOt that i"m a fan, but one wonders if they aren't
RW>> listening to some of the real concerns voiced by all the
RW>> folks who join the tea party or occupy. Don't they (the
RW>> leadership of the Republican party) grasp this at all?
BK>> The republican leaders, (not the figureheads out front), realize
BK>> the Tea Party is no more rational than any other nut cases out
BK>> there. However, they do have big numbers so they pull the
RW> Agreed. But, if you're not totally burying your head in
RW> your nether parts if you're a political leader you have to
RW> grok the real dissatisfaction and anger coming from both
RW> sides of the political divide.
BK> Yep. That and the loss of the middle to those who push too hard to
BK> the extremes. That is one thing that has been discussed in the
BK> papers recently.
YEp, and they still won't pay attention to it.
BK> Third parties don't really make it better, they tend to drive the
BK> second biggest party to the edge to ally with the third biggest
BK> party to beat the biggest party. Single issue politics becomes more
BK> important.
True, look at Ron Paul turning republican as an example.
RW> Note your recent discussions in this echo re the labor
RW> movement, those who "produce" goods are the true earners.
RW> If the only way you can control organized efforts by those
RW> "earners" to be sure they're compensated fairly is to
RW> deprive them of the ability to earn that's what you do, as
RW> demonstrated by Wall Street. You have to admit, that was
RW> more effective than all the strikebreakers and goons they
RW> could hire. IF, in the process you destroy a country, so
RW> be it.
BK> Unfortunately you have it quite right.
I know i do. I've learned the history. Lived it during its demise. The
gains of the 20th century wiped out by
plutocrats who are so damned unwilling to compromise to
benefit themselves and others too that they'd rather destroy what made them
plutocrats in the first place.
RW> But, this anger too will fizzle out imho. At least our
RW> labor movement gave people a coherent vehicle to channel
RW> their discontent or attempt to get a fairer shake.
BK> Yep. As a result they produced the lowest poverty rates and the
BK> most powerful economy anyone ever saw. Now it's all going away.
OF course it is. I want it all or i"ll destroy it.
RW> with its warm fuzzies and the tea party with its
RW> manipulation of the gullible seniors will both make a lot
RW> of noise then pfft. Meanwhile isolate them in their homes,
RW> they'll play with their electronic boxes and be happy good
RW> little sheeple again when they realize there isn't a damn
RW> thing they can do about it.
BK> They pushed it too far. When it gets to where their homes are
BK> being lost there is no place to be isolated. That part they hadn't
BK> anticipated. And that's where the anger grows.
YEah but a good percentage of those folks weren't homeowners anyway.
RW> Welcome to the culmination of the society depicted by
RW> ORwell.
BK> Only Orwell assumed a war to take people's minds off things. He
BK> didn't consider the possibility of enemies so dangerous they don't
BK> dare start the war. The wars they do dare start are so expensive,
BK> and so meaningles, they don't really work. That and a lot of the
BK> players have different rule books.
Again agreed, but they'll find another boogeyman to scare
the sheeple with.
BK> I see it all coming apart in the not too distant future, unless
BK> someone gets it together.
Fat chance of that!
Regards,
Richard
---
* Origin: (1:116/901)
|
